Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes referred to in Article 2018 senior group 1537, 2169, and 3014.

A. Defendant 1) In determining Defendant 1 guilty of the crime of assault, which is a reduced fact, on the grounds that there is no proof of injury as to the part of the facts charged under 2018 Highest 2169, the lower court acquitted Defendant 1 only on the grounds of the judgment. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which led to the misapprehension of the legal doctrine and did not render a verdict of innocence as to the part

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court acquitted the Defendant and the victim on the part of the facts charged under 2018 High Court Decision 2018 High Court Decision 2169; however, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts concerning the injury. 2) The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts reveals that the injury suffered by the victim, on the grounds of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, appears to have no difficulty in daily life and to have been naturally cured due to the passage of time, and that it does not constitute injury as it is difficult to view that the physical integrity, the function of life has been damaged, or the health condition has been changed properly. 2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined by the lower court’s judgment and the first instance court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined by the investigation agency, namely, ① from the investigation agency to the court of the first instance, the victim consistently stated to the effect that “the victim was at the time when the Defendant was able to live in a cell, fleep, fleep, and flicked, fleeped, and flicked, and flicked the head and body of the victim.”